Cube vs Abacum
Two of fourteen models named Cube first on the direct prompt; three named Abacum. Cube was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Abacum by nine and Cube carries 51 labels and Abacum 16, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in eight categories this edition.
Named in six categories this edition.
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the FP&A platforms page.
By framing
CubeFirst choices, of fourteen modelsAbacum
Every model, every framing
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | |||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | |||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | |||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | | | | |||
| Mistral Small | | | | |||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | ||||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | |||
| Kimi K2 | | | | | ||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | ||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | |||
| GPT-6 Luna | | |||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | |
Cube Abacum first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Cube on the left and Abacum on the right.The direct prompt
Cube first, Abacum not the choice
2 of 14 modelsAbacum was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Abacum first, Cube an alternative
3 of 14 modelsCube was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Neither was the first choice, one was named
6 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Neither was named
3 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
Cube0%#13 of 14Abacum0%#– of 14What the models said about Cube
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of four in this category shown.
“Options to Avoid on a Limited Budget ... Cube — Starts around $1,250–$2,000/month” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“These are usually priced per *user*... For 10+ users, the cost will escalate rapidly” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“Best for: Lean finance teams ($20M–$150M in revenue) looking for rapid implementation... exceptionally fast "time-to-first-forecast"” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Cube is the strongest default recommendation because it is repeatedly positioned as the best small-business FP&A option” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Abacum
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Two of two in this category shown.
“older versions of Mosaic/Abacum... These replace spreadsheets entirely” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Drivetrain and Abacum stand out for their advanced features, scalability, and ease of implementation” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.